We can also report that shooter Jared Loughner was certainly not a conservative. In his own words, his favorite books included The Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf. Communism is obviously as left wing as it gets, and see here about Nazism, which for what it’s worth means “National Socialism.” In that article, I point out that:

Marxism simply redefined fascism as its polar opposite in order to create a bogeyman: If Marxism was progressive, fascism became conservative. If Marxism was left wing, fascism had to be right wing. If Marxism championed the proletariat, then fascism had to champion the bourgeoisie. If Marxism was socialist, fascism needed to be capitalist.

I further offered that:

“The influence of Marxist scholarship has severely distorted our understanding of fascism. Communism and fascism were rival brands of socialism. Whereas Marxist socialism is predicated on an international class struggle, fascist national socialism promoted a socialism centered in national unity. Both communists and fascists opposed the bourgeoisie. Both attacked the conservatives. Both were mass movements, which had special appeal for the intelligentsia, students, and artists, as well as workers. Both favored strong centralized governments and rejected the free economy and the ideals of individual liberty.” [Gene Edward Veith, Jr., Modern Fascism: Liquidating the Judeo-Christian Worldview, p. 26].

And I rightly concluded:

And if the Nazis didn’t represent the far left, they were at best the right wing of the extreme left wing.

I mean, seriously: the difference between Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, and their respective oppressive, paranoid and murderous totalitarian regimes, is what, exactly???

Pathetically, the last and strongest bastion of Marxism in America today reside in our universities and are allowed to wear the title “professor.” And then you find out thatTHE most leftist and THE most intolerant, “thought-controlling” field in America is that of university professors. And they get to influence and shape minds just like Jared Lougher’s.

I would at this point mention another fact about Loughner that the AP brought out, how he was “obsessed with how words create reality.” And, like the atheism, that is a telltale of liberalism. It is deconstructionism, it is existentialism, it is nihilism, it is postmodern.

Jonah Goldberg said it better than I could:

For more than sixty years, liberals have insisted that the bacillus of fascism lies semi-dormant in the bloodstream of the political right. And yet with the notable and complicated exceptions of Leo Strauss and Allan Bloom, no top-tier American conservative intellectual was a devotee of Nietzsche or a serious admirer of Heidegger. All major conservative schools of thought trace themselves back to the champions of the Enlightenment–John Locke, Adam Smith, Montesquieu, Burke–and none of them have any direct intellectual link to Nazism or Nietzsche, to existentialism, nihilism, or even, for the most part, Pragmatism. Meanwhile, the ranks of the leftwing intellectuals are infested with ideas and thinkers squarely in the fascist tradition. And yet all it takes is the abracadabra word “Marxist” to absolve most of them of any affinity with these currents. The rest get off the hook merely by attacking bourgeois morality and American values–even though such attacks are themselves little better than a reprise of fascist arguments.” — Jonah Goldberg, Liberal Fascism, p. 175.

Jared Loughner is also profoundly unAmerican. His claimed favorite video at his Youtube account is of the US flag being torched. Which clearly makes him a very different critter the left has characterized the “flag-worshiping” Republicans who read the Constitutions “like a sacred text.”

Loughner, an ardent atheist, began to characterize people as sheep whose free will was being sapped by the monotony of modern life.

Surveys clearly demonstrate that the less religious – or more atheistic – a person is, the more likely they are to be politically liberal. Which is to say we’re not just saying Jared Loughner is a liberal based on rhetoric, but rather that he is probably a liberal based on the laws of statistics and probability.

the tragedy wouldn’t change this basic fact: for the past two years, many conservative leaders, activists, and media figures have made a habit of trying to delegitimize their political opponents

But isn’t the New Yorker merely trying to delegitimize their political opponents, the conservatives? I mean, how can the people who do what the left are claiming conservatives do possibly be legitimate?

Which means their argument and all their claims and stories become pure ad hominem.

Both sides “target” vulnerable seats. Any Democrat who “targets” Sarah Palin is a vile piece of slime. Because your party does the exact same thing [please see my update at the bottom of this article].

The only thing they can point to in demonizing Republicans is the fact that Rep. Gifford is a Democrat. And that is clearly true. However, she is a blue dog Democrat who has described herself as “conservative.” And one of the murdered victims was a very conservative federal judge (Judge John Roll) who was appointed by George Bush. Judge Roll was there to thank Rep. Giffords for trying to get more judges to deal with the massive illegal immigration crisis.

This event ought to be something that transcends the political arguments and the debate over which party should run America that constantly goes on. Because ANY act of violence which accompanies a political statement of any kind undermines ALL of us by eroding our freedom and liberty.

You cannot have a democratic republic in a police state. And the more politically violent any group or individuals become, the more police powers become necessary to impose order.

I don’t care what your politics are; if you are an American, this is a terrible, tragic day and a genuinely evil event.

The website Daily Kos has also deleted a diary about Rep. Gabrielle Giffords entitled “My Congresswoman Voted Against Pelosi, Now She’s Dead To Me,” but so far has not deleted a post by founder Markos Moulitsas that lists Giffords’ district among those on their “target list,” and noted that “Not all of these people will get or even deserve primaries, but this vote certainly puts a bulls eye on their district.” (emphasis ours).

Please explain to me why Sarah Palin’s use of surveyor symbols or whichever angry conservative comments resulted in Gabrielle Giffords being shot rather than leftwingers putting her on their “bulls eye” “target list,” or influential liberals like Moulitsas saying that Giffords is “dead to me.” Because I’d really like to know.